Does incidental sequence learning allow us to better manage upcoming conflicting events?
- 5 Downloads
Recent proposals emphasize the role of learning in empirical markers of conflict adaptation. Some of these proposals are rooted in the assumption that contingency learning works not only on stimulus–response events but also on covert processes such as selective attention. In the present study, we explored how these learning processes may apply to trial-to-trial modulations of selective attention, mirroring the sequential nature of congruency sequence effects. Two groups of participants performed a four-choice Stroop task in which the color to which they responded on each trial acted as a probabilistic predictor either of the external response to be emitted on the next trial, or the congruency level (and therefore control demands) on the next trial. The results showed clear effects of sequence learning for external responses, but no evidence of learning about sequential stimulus–conflict associations. The implications of these results are discussed in relation to other learning-based phenomena of conflict adaptation and suggest that learning of stimulus–control associations is strongly constrained by event boundaries.
The present research was funded by the Spanish Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad with a research Grant to Luis Jiménez (PSI2015-70990-P).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in the study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study
- Crump, M. J. C., Brosowsky, N. P., & Milliken, B. (2017). Reproducing the location-based context-specific proportion congruent effect for frequency unbiased items: A reply to Hutcheon and Spieler (2016). The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(9), 1792–1807. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2016.1206130.Google Scholar
- D’Angelo, M. C., Jiménez, L., Milliken, B., & Lupiáñez, J. (2013). On the specificity of sequential congruency effects in implicit learning of motor and perceptual sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(1), 69–84. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028474.Google Scholar
- Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191.Google Scholar
- Inquisit 4 [Computer Software]. (2015). Retrieved from https://www.millisecond.com. Accessed 2 Mar 2016.
- JASP (Version 0.9) [Computer Software]. (2018). https://jasp-stats.org/. Accessed 6 Dec 2018.
- Norman, D. A., & Shallice, T. (1986). Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behavior. In R. J. Davidson, G. E. Schwartz, & D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and self-regulation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 4, pp. 1–18). New York: Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-0629-1_1.Google Scholar
- Schmidt, J. R., De Houwer, J., & Rothermund, K. (2016). The parallel episodic processing (PEP) model 2.0: A single computational model of stimulus-response binding, contingency learning, power curves, and mixing costs. Cognitive Psychology, 91, 82–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.10.004.Google Scholar